harrypotterfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Glasses
Interesting thought: where do spectacles/glasses fit into the wizarding world/muggle world. Are they a muggle creation or a wizard creation? Which bears to mind, if the wizarding world has shut themselves away from the muggle world and many act as if they know nothing of the muggle world. --BachLynn23 19:05, July 28, 2010 (UTC) :J.K. Rowling has stated that wizards have appropriated/perfected some Muggle ideas (such as radios and cameras) to their own use. I would think glasses are yet another Muggle invention that wizards have liked enough to use. -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 19:14, July 28, 2010 (UTC) Real world I know some of the sites here have added sections with trivia regarding real world information about certain objects, names or words. I wasn't sure what kind of heading to put this under, or even if I should but I was thinking of adding: Salvino D'Armate is credited with inventing the first wearable eye glasses sometime around 1284 in Italy. And/or reference the wikipedia article on glasses/spectacles. What does anyone else think? --BachLynn23 21:08, July 30, 2010 (UTC) Harry Potter's Glasses This discussion was moved from Talk:Harry Potter's Glasses. Is this page entirely neccessary? Many characters in the series wore glasses, so unless we make pages for every pair of glasses worn in the series, this page should be deleted.Icecreamdif 21:24, July 21, 2011 (UTC) I agree.'Ogwarts 06:42, August 1, 2011 (UTC) Well, the subject on why Harry needs glasses is quite intriguing - why does Harry need glasses anyway? If he has 'his mother's eyes' and his mother did not wear glasses, where did he get the need from? Is it possible for a person to have a different donor for eye colour than for subscription?GunsFallSilent (talk) 19:04, October 14, 2015 (UTC)GunsFallSilent Maybe James passed him the bad eyesight. Or the Dursleys somehow ruined his vision for him. ArianaFan14[[User talk:ArianaFan14|''' (talk)]] 21:24, October 14, 2015 (UTC) Spectacles? Is "spectacles" really the term used in the British editions of the books, and if not, why are we using it? ProfessorTofty (talk) 17:43, January 25, 2013 (UTC) :No, it isn't. The Canadian ones are supposedly the same as the UK ones, and the Canadian ones say "glasses". Should I therefore move the article accordingly? --Hunnie Bunn (Owl me!) 19:58, January 27, 2013 (UTC) ::I'll move it now. ProfessorTofty (talk) 01:24, January 31, 2013 (UTC) So this is an old question... ....but in a world of magic where injuries can be healed, why are glasses even necessary, aside from style? Est Nikkas Oth Mithas (talk) 01:16, October 12, 2015 (UTC) :Magic can't fix everything. Poor eyesight can't be fixed by magic. --ArianaFan14[[User talk:ArianaFan14| (talk)']] 18:58, October 12, 2015 (UTC) :A very good question. For the first response, there is no evidence that poor eyesight cannot be fixed by magic. :Sometimes as humans, we prefer more antiquated solutions for problems. I am sure those old enough remember when we were told that paperwork and printers would soon be obsolete. Instead, today we print more documents than we ever did before. The use of electronic books is increasing, but still the vast majority of people prefer to have a printed book in their hands when they read. :In the "real" world there is surgery like LASIX that can cure some vision problems. However, after wearing glasses for many years, I couldn't envision myself ''not wearing glasses. :So I think we can conclude that magic can in fact cure vision problems (obliviate the need for glasses.) Remember, JKR has stated that magic can cure almost every "muggle" malady or injury. One important point to keep in mind is that the geometry of the eyeball changes throughout life. So, if one needed to correct the lens in a child's eyes, it might have to be done many times as they grow up, and then again and again as they age and the geometery changes. It has also been shown that most spells eventually wear off. So between the possibility of the spells being done wrong and causing irreparable damage, the need to constantly update the spells as a person's eyeball changes, and the difficulty (especially in previous years) of explaining to muggle friends why their child had horrible vision one day, and perfect the next it is probably just simpler to wear glasses. :Finally, it seems that the wizard world is not as eager to use magic as muggles might be if they had the ability. There are probably spells that proivde permanent cosmetics, or permanent hairstyling, or a spell that has the same effects as taking a bath, or whatever. However, due to the limits on "underage spells", young witches/wizards have to do such things without magic, and they probably simply get used to it. Wva (talk) 19:27, October 12, 2015 (UTC) sight correcting Many wizards and witches wear glasses, so it seems that magic is unable to cure myopia (near-sightedness), hyperopia (far-sightedness), or astigmatism in the same way that Muggle laser surgery can. However, a lost eye can be replaced with a magical prosthesis like that of "Mad-Eye" Moody, which not only restored vision, but had advantages over a normal eye. Isn't it possible that they just choose to continue wearing glasses, for several possible rasons, including being used to wearing glasses or that the treatment may be expansive? Many Muggles in our time wear glasses, too. Just because you don't undergo treatment doesn't neccessarily mean it doesn't exist. --Rodolphus (talk) 06:39, July 16, 2017 (UTC)